CPK

Question 1

R v Mallinson - an inference that he understood his rights

Answer 1

Unless contrary evidence to show otherwise,

Question 2

R v HINA - Detainers right

Answer 2

It is the detainers right to ensure the whole right is conveyed and understood - or at least in a manner open to understanding

Question 3

R v TUNUI - rights given more than once

Answer 3

It may be necessary to inform an offender more than once of their rights

Question 4

R v GRANT - rights given in written form

Answer 4

If the suspect has been given a caution in a written form, then the act has been complied with

Question 5

R v Butcher and Burgess - Police not expected to mutter rights if threatened

Answer 5

Until a situation is controlled - Police do not need to give rights if threatened

Question 6

R v Maillinson - without delay is not immediately

Answer 6

the expression - without delay - is not synonymous with instantly or immediately

Question 7

R v Piper - right to privacy if dangerous to do so

Answer 7

Police may be justified in not offering privacy where privacy would be dangerous to leave the accused alone

Question 8

Kerr v Police - honest attempt to contact a lawyer

Answer 8

An honest and determined attempt was made by Police to contact a lawyer for the accused

Question 9

R v Biddle - right by accused to waive having a lawyer present

Answer 9

As long as it is conveyed clearly and with full knowledge of having that right.

Question 10

Police v Kholar - a valid waiver

Answer 10

a valid waiver requires a conscious choice that is both informed and voluntary and cannot be implied from silence or failure to request it

Question 11

R v Rogers - accused must be charged promptly however

Answer 11

a reasonable time for processing, arranging a lawyer, interviewing and other police emergencies are justified limitations

Question 12

Evidence Act 2006 - sec 28, 29 and 30

Answer 12

28 - reliability rule
29 - oppression rule
30 - improperly obtained evidence rule

Question 13

Evidence Act 2006 - s28 Reliability Rule - Exclusion of unreliable statements

Answer 13

1. Judge must consider the following - physical, mental and phycological condition of the defendant at the time of the statement
2. Characteristics of the defendant inc any mental, physical or intellectual disability
3. Nature of any questions put to the defendant, and manner they were put to him
4. Nature of any threat, promise or representation made to the defendant or any other person

Question 14

Exception to the sec 28 reliability rule - where prosecution wants to use the statement as evidence to the defendants?

Answer 14

Physical, mental and phycological condition at the time the statement was made

Question 15

Evidence Act 2006 - Sec 29 - Oppression rule

Answer 15

Exclusion of statements obtained by oppression.

Question 16

R v HAWEA - Oppression rule - admissibility objection

Answer 16

The most serious ground of objection to the admissibility of a defendant’s statement - requires prosecution to satisfy the Judge beyond reasonable doubt that the statement was not obtained by oppression.

Question 17

Sec 30(6) - Evidence Act 2006 - Police practice note on questioning

Answer 17

A Judge must consider the practice note in determining whether a defendant’s statement was obtained (un)fairly

Question 18

Police practice note on questioning - Sec 30(6) EA2006 - a member of Police investigating an offence may ask

Answer 18

questions of any person from whom it is thought useful information may be obtained. but must not suggest that it is compulsory for the person questioned to answer.

Question 19

Sec 30(6) - Evidence Act 2006 - Clause 2 - sufficient evidence to charge a person

Answer 19

1. whenever a member of the police has sufficient evidence to charge a person with an offence, and 2. whenever a member of Police seeks to questions a person in custody.

Question 20

HOHUA v R - test of evidential sufficiency to arrest someone

Answer 20

Suspicion alone, reasonable or otherwise, does not trigger a requirement to caution a suspect in the absence of evidence to charge the person.

Question 21

ELIA v R - Explanations must be given in a manner and a language that is appropriate to the age and level of understanding of the child or young person

Answer 21

An officer must explain fully, eahc of the rights - a mere recitation will be insufficient.

Question 22

Phillips V R - Voluntary statements inadmissible if not recorded fairly in accordance with clause 5 practice note on police questioning

Answer 22

Given the opportunity to review and correct any errors then sign as correct

Question 23

Police prevent crime and harm through: 1. Holding offenders to account with the right resolution and

Answer 23

2. community focussed problem solving and 3. supporting victims

Question 24

Robertson v R - must be cautioned before making a statement and rights not repeated for new offence

Answer 24

s

Question 25

Police hate crime definition is: any offence which is perceived

Answer 25

by the victim or any other person to be motivated wholly or in part by a hostility or prejudice based on a persons race, sexual orientation, age, gender etc

Question 26

Hate Crimes v Hate Incidents

Answer 26

Crimes are arrestable, hate incidents are noted due to potential escalation to a hate crime (perceived hate).

Question 27

Hate Crime - Police response to hate crime incidents RRR

Answer 27

Recognise, record and respond

Question 28

Primary role of police in the “Safe System” plan for road to zero 2030 is:

Answer 28

to encourage all road users to make safe choices when on the road.

Question 29

R v Arps - Hate motivation under Sec 9 Sentencing Act 2002 and Sec 14 BORA 1990

Answer 29

Appealed sentenced based on freedom of expression under Sec 14 BORA which was dismissed due to his hate towards muslims

Question 30

Road policing deterrence theory

Answer 30

prevent risky driving behaviour in most people by using general deterrence

Question 30

Urgent duty driving

Answer 30

must be a justified response to the threat

Question 31

Urgent duty driving overarching principle is that public and police saftey takes precedence over the

Answer 31

necessity to undertake urgent duty driving.

Question 32

The police response to each fleeing driver event must be

Answer 32

reasonable, proportionate and necessary
Lawful
Justified, considering all the circumstances and
compliant with Police Instructions and policy